State retirement age is too old for working class people

[Spiceup]

An observation from some things I've seen lately. I'll explain.

I work in a public sector organisation that employees highly qualified and very well paid professionals alongside support staff on not much more than minimum wage and those in between.

Part of my role is managing sickness absence. What I am seeing lately is that the professional types, despite doing what are generally accepted to be stressful jobs, on the whole, stay well until well into their sixties, although many do retire earlier simply because they have the kind of pensions that make that possible.

People in the more lowly jobs are often genuinely finished by their mid-late 50s. Just worn out and suffering from multiple health problems. Perhaps because of their lifestyles or maybe from just having harder lives (not necessarily harder work lives, but getting by is just generally harder for them). To have to go on to 67 is just absurd and very few do, with ill health retirement common (so the state is paying anyway).

I can't begin to imagine how similar people manage in genuinely physical jobs, in construction for example.

Is it more common for working class people in their 50s to be worn out, or perhaps more comfortably off professionals retire before they get to that point so I don't see it?

Agreed my health declined terribly after 58

It makes me so angry.
There is absolutely no way a person who does a physically demanding or heavy manual job could still be able to do that job at 67!!
It makes me further angry that people, particularly women who were supposed to retire at 60, suddenly had another 7 years whacked on top.
The government won't be happy until retirement means being taken out of your workplace in a wooden box!!
The multi millionaire government and the bloody politicians remind me of the bloody wealthy mill owners of yesteryear, who would live in bloody big mansions, feasting on fine food while their workers were half starved and worked to bloody death for a pittance!!
It's not just the conservatives, it's the whole bloody shower of them!
Now they're talking of removing the triple lock.
I feel really sorry for anyone who has a good few years left to work, particularly the young ones who are just entering into the workforce.
They want you to work your fingers to the bone until you gasp your last, preferably as you're punching your clock card in!

At least young people have mandated employers contributions to their pensions. Lots of us had nothing.

I don't know if anyone's got an expectation of a long paid holiday from paid work before death, I don't.
But we need a little bit of realism here and understanding that humans are just that - human, they get ill, they get old, they wear out, they break down.
There's just more and more demand to not do any of those things from employers and the government, and to be expected to behave like robots and never falter. In fact the bloody equipment where I work gets treated better when there's something wrong with it that needs fixing than the human staff do - it gets paid for to be fixed, because it's seen as an asset - I get the impression that many see their employees as a burden to be tolerated rather than the actual heart and soul of the company, and I feel the government feels the same about the voters.
The fact that you can be disciplined for being ill too much is ridiculous, I know that illness and performance need to be managed and processes followed, but to be subject to discipline implies wrong doing, fault somehow - for being human.
The attitude is just wrong IMO.
We're just treated like tools to make or save companies and the government money like that's our only function for being alive.
Pisses me off.

The government wants children to look after their own parents, but if they are all working how will that happen. There is no joined up thinking

I get the impression that many see their employees as a burden to be tolerated rather than the actual heart and soul of the company, and I feel the government feels the same about the voters.
The fact that you can be disciplined for being ill too much is ridiculous, I know that illness and performance need to be managed and processes followed, but to be subject to discipline implies wrong doing, fault somehow - for being human

Yes I agree.

The other issue here is we (the government) want people to work until they are 67 (and probably beyond), yet not enough is done about age discrimination in the workplace. In fact a pp said she wasn't sure her father should be working in his 70s and taking away a job from someone younger. There's no "taking away a job" because of your age. Anyone is entitled to work at any age if they have the right qualifications and experience (and are healthy enough).

@Julieca True, but for a lot of people don't have that as it's only a recent thing, yet they're expected to work until they're 67, and the government is looking at increasing that.
I'm fortunate in that I could retire from full time to part time in my early fifties, but a hell of a lot of people of my age don't have that option sadly.
The ones of my age and a bit younger won't have paid enough in ' workplace pensions ' to enable retiring before 67.

@Donotgogentle actuaries calculate the state pension age given certain parameters. Said parameters are the political decisions rather than the age itself.

Expectations of ability to work, retirement living costs, etc al of these are complex variables.

I don't know if anyone's got an expectation of a long paid holiday from paid work before death, I don't.

But why shouldn't people? If you've worked all your adult life - particularly if you've worked full-time and never had any kind of break, even to do alternative work such as caring for a family - is it right that you should go to your grave never having had more than a couple of weeks to yourself as an adult; never to have had a holiday where you weren't conscious of the clock ticking down to when you were back to work?

To be honest, if there's no prospect of that in the future to look forward to, I for one don't see much point in going on living now just to face neverending toil - and I am sure I am not the only one.

A lot of young people now do get an extended childhood. Older people did not have that, especially working-class older people. We were all working full-time at 16 years old.
I suspect I will just end up in my sixties signing on and having to apply for jobs that I have no chance of getting.
And the person who talked about people being disciplined for being ill is right. Most people as they get older do have more time off ill. Either for operations such as knee operations or just because it takes longer to recover from viruses.

@ArblemarchTFruitbat

I don't know if anyone's got an expectation of a long paid holiday from paid work before death, I don't.

But why shouldn't people? If you've worked all your adult life - particularly if you've worked full-time and never had any kind of break, even to do alternative work such as caring for a family - is it right that you should go to your grave never having had more than a couple of weeks to yourself as an adult; never to have had a holiday where you weren't conscious of the clock ticking down to when you were back to work?

To be honest, if there's no prospect of that in the future to look forward to, I for one don't see much point in going on living now just to face neverending toil - and I am sure I am not the only one.

What’s long though - 5,10,20 years? Why is the only choice a full-time job or nothing?

People who are retiring now, at 66, have often worked since they were 16. Surely that is long enough?

BTW I always worked full time, and sometimes did shift work, even when my kids were young. Yes, I had maternity leave but had to return early as I did not have the money to take the full year.

@TractorAndHeadphones only those in well-paid jobs can afford to go part-time. Do you really think that is an option for people on minimum wage?
And honestly comments like that just piss me off. It just shows how some people haven't got a clue.

@loislovesstewie

People who are retiring now, at 66, have often worked since they were 16. Surely that is long enough?

Exactly! Fifty years full-time is a long time to work.

[quote julieca]@TractorAndHeadphones only those in well-paid jobs can afford to go part-time. Do you really think that is an option for people on minimum wage?
And honestly comments like that just piss me off. It just shows how some people haven't got a clue.[/quote]
So if people can’t afford to go part-time how are they going to afford retirement on the state pensions
alone - which is only £180 a week?

You’re the one who hasn’t got a clue. Many people have to keep working past state pension age because the state pension isn’t enough. The age isn’t a problem because if you had money you could go a) go part-time and b) wouldn’t be relying on state pension anyway.

It’s the cost of living and how wealth is distributed in this country that’s the real issue.

@TractorAndHeadphones I can live on £180 a week. Because there are benefits for people on the state pension with no other income and no or very low savings.
But I actually could live on £180 a week. My current wage is £1200 and I try and save from that.

Also to add - the state pension calculation is based on people having made some provision for themselves and having minimal expenses due to big things like a mortgage and children being paid off.

That’s clearly not the case many are not property owners and continue to face high rents.

This one size fits all state pension would cost too much so the question is - means test, or give out the minimum affordable and let people sit themselves out?

I suspect it’ll be the former and many many people paying NI today will get nothing when they eventually retire

Most people simply do not have enough pension to not get a state pension. Private pensions have been sold to most in the past as a way to top up state pension, not to replace them.
My parents only get their state pension. They also get benefits for rent and council tax as well as heating allowance, free prescriptions and bus pass.

There's a tsunami coming our way in terms of pensioner poverty and a care crisis over the coming years. The assumption has always been that people will have some savings and a significant majority will own a house. That's not true for the Millennial generation, onwards who have been dealing to crazy house prices and declining affordability.

On top of that is the idea that people will take care of their elderly parents. This assumes that the children will have the time and leisure to do so, no health problems of their own, no need to pay into a pension (carers allowance is a joke) and actually exist in first place! Families are getting smaller, poorer and more fragmented.

Japan now has 86000 people who are 100+ & the trend increases every year

UK stats below

Some people, spend more time retired, than at work

The Government cannot afford to reduce the state pension age, due to people living longer & improvements in medecine

www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/ageing/bulletins/estimatesoftheveryoldincludingcentenarians/2002to2020

I don't know if anyone's got an expectation of a long paid holiday from paid work before death, I don't.

I do!
I really look forward to my time and head space being my own. Doesn’t have to be a holiday, as in, going away and spending lots of ££. Just having the time and energy to potter, read, see GC, meet friends. And go to all the dr/ hospital appointments which can be very time consuming!

@TheABC I see comment after comment on here from younger people that they are not looking after their parents.
My generation are less likely to do physical care such as toileting, but we do lots of other care such as taking parents to hospital appointments, sorting out carers, sorting out paperwork, etc, All of this can be time-consuming. If the younger generation won't do this, social care will collapse.

@Day5DayandNight5 it is well off people who spend more time retired than working. THey often didn't start work full time until their twenties either.
Working-class people my generation will have worked for 50 or 51 years full time by the time they retire at 66 or 67. No chance of retirement being longer than working life unless they end up being the oldest people alive.

@ArblemarchTFruitbat and @Chewbecca

I agree with you both in principle, the idea of working all these years in the job I have with another 25 to go and more than likely either dying before I get the chance to do anything I want to do or being too knackered and still skint by that age to do it is soul destroying - but I'm realistic and with my circumstances at the moment unless they drastically change (and I'm plugging away slowly to make that happen!) That's really what I'm facing and I don't have any expectations of it being any better than that because I can't see on what I earn, and the tiny increases in pay that comes with seniority and experience, that it can possibly be any different for me and those like me.
I've more or less accepted it, but my God it smarts when I'm then told with the authority of privilege that actually, it's all my own fault implying I don't deserve any better when I've spent a lifetime supporting society.
(Not that I'm suggesting either of you have done that btw ☺️)